Re: Ada open source

[Brian May <bam@snoopy.apana.org.au>]

>>>>> "Steve" == Steve  <nospam_steved94@comcast.net> writes:

    Steve> Please cite a piece of closed source software that is
    Steve> "feature complete" and bug free.

First step: define "feature complete"!

There always seems to be room for adding new features. Even the
traditional "hello world" program is not immune. Check out the feature
rich "hello world" program available at:
<URL:ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/hello/hello-2.1.1.tar.gz> for instance.
There appear to be three versions of this in Debian.

What is more important is: "does it meet my requirements?" rather then
"does it have all possible features including the ability to make a
cup of coffee". I don't think it is possible to write software that
will meet everyone's requirements.

When you do find such software, no doubt it will be so bloated with
features 99% people don't use that it will be unusable for 99% people
;-).

Getting back to the original post. I would speculate the posting was
written by a user rather then a programmer, hence the significance of
having source code available may not be obvious.

The way I read it: closed source is better then open source because
open source authors concentrate more on major development, bug fixes
and security fixes rather then adding small features. If so, aren't
these all reasons why (a) open source is better, because the authors
want to get the program "correct" before adding endless numbers of
small features and (b) using Ada might save time with bug fixes and
security fixes?

I would suggest that the problem with closed-source packages is that,
in a number of cases, the author gives the users what they want,
without designing it correctly, without testing it correctly, without
securing it correctly, etc, and as users cannot see the source code
they don't know what the quality of the coding is like.

Another issue with closed-source packages I have encountered from time
to time occurs if the author abandons the product; it is no longer
possible to legally obtain it, no longer possible to get even the
simplest bugs fixed, etc. Replacing the software may require replacing
hardware, even though the current system generally works fine.
-- 
Brian May <bam@snoopy.apana.org.au>